Homeowner: Keep 150 ft away from my dock!

[Lake Fan]

An average boater with a current chart shouldn't be held liable for poorly written/indecipherable regulations.

I guess I'd better start researching all the No Wake and no Rafting Zone regulations on the lake and cross-referencing them with NHMP and State of NH regulations, as well as confirming the locations with town tax maps before heading out on the lake.

And all that being said, the more courtesy the better on the water from both boaters and shoreline owners alike.

[Rich]

I agree with you! Everyone should be courteous!

Trying to decipher this area from the written law is confusing. Sort of 'it depends on the definition of what "is" is'! LOL

Here are all the tax maps:
http://www.tuftonboro.org/Pages/Tuft...ap%20Index.PDF

Here is map 63:
http://www.tuftonboro.org/pages/Tuft...s/map%2063.PDF
Here is map 51:
http://www.tuftonboro.org/pages/Tuft...s/map%2051.PDF

The text of the law says "Southern Boundary of tax map" when referring to both lots that are supposed to mark the NRZ. So I'm not sure if it is describing the location on the map (southern boundary) as to where to find the lot in question (which seems most likely), or to describe the southern boundary of the lot as the point where the NRZ starts and ends.

I would say that the state law has a typo as Bizer mentioned tax map 15 doesn't even touch the lake, and lot 20 on it is no where near the area in question (not to mention there are more than one lot 20 on that map also).

Does anyone care to show how they can interpret this rule in any way other than what Bizer has documented?

[caloway]

All it does is take rights to a public resource away from boaters and give it to a small subset of landowners. It doesn't even effectively address the purported reasons for it's existence--all it does is shuffle the activity around to someone else's dock.

We'd be better off directly addressing the issues involved rather than applying rules in a ham-fisted manner.

[tis]

Bizer, are you saying you think the No Rafting Zone is between the two lines you have drawn?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by tis

Bizer, are you saying you think the No Rafting Zone is between the two lines you have drawn?

Could you be looking at the lat/long lines from his chart?

The NRZ is depicted by the darker blue dot-dash printed line running from the aqua colored star marked 63-2-14 to the red star marked 51-3-20.

[tis]

Originally Posted by Rich

Could you be looking at the lat/long lines from his chart?

The NRZ is depicted by the darker blue dot-dash printed line running from the aqua colored star marked 63-2-14 to the red star marked 51-3-20.

Rich, could you somehow draw a circle where you think Bizer thinks the Zone is? If I understand where he is saying it is a place where boats seldom moor or raft.

[Bizer]

Originally Posted by tis

Rich, could you somehow draw a circle where you think Bizer thinks the Zone is? If I understand where he is saying it is a place where boats seldom moor or raft.

There is a no-rafting zone is depicted on Bizer's chart on the northeast side of Tuftonboro Neck, west of light 15, and north of Winter Harbor Way. It is outlined with a blue dashed line. [See photo above in post #36] That was my best guess back in 1998, but that was before 2014 when I discovered that there were multiple lots with the same lot numbers on tax maps. No one has the authority to unilaterally pick which "lot 20" is the one. And since the true, on-file regulation in Concord has never been corrected, it is my best estimate that the no-rafting zone lies somewhere north of a blue Pontiac with Iowa plates. In other words, it can't be defined. Keep in mind, IANAL.

I have deleted that NRZ from my database pending a response from NHMP.

[Bizer]

Originally Posted by tis

Bizer, are you saying you think the No Rafting Zone is between the two lines you have drawn?

Based on available knowledge now, I'd say the no-rafting zone is undefined. This regulation begs to be tested in the courts. Based on the email I received last fall, that is what it's gonna take. That Winter Harbor resident (if it's the same one) calls the MP frequently and they oblige by writing tickets. My hunch (and this is only a hunch) is that that resident was the author of this regulation and rushed it through the approval process without proofreading what he wrote.